DB Field naming conventions

[mattlub]

In this PR I am populating the placeId field in the events model

I want to change the field name in the events model to place instead of placeId

• I would also propose to do the same on all fields which currently end in 'id', even if we do not plan to populate them.

The potential problems with this is confusion:

• this would mean on POST, you would have to send an id under the place field

---

@des-des mentioned the possibility of sending it back as place when populated, but keeping the db field as placeId. The problem here is seeming inconsistency in the model between a POST and a GET. Does anyone do this?

Thoughts? @m4v15 @des-des @mantagen

[mattlub]

I am leaning towards @des-des suggestion now to be honest.

[des-des]

Yeah this is a really good question that I do not have an answer to. Maybe @mantagen has some thoughts. I think if you are on the fence, go for the path of least resistance.. ?

[m4v15]

Yeah my whole issue with it was that in the DB it's just an id not a place itself, I'm pro calling it place id in the DB models but in the response object call it place. I see what you mean about the POST issue, but I don't think it's a massive problem - however you probably have more of an idea of this due doing stuff with Mohamed on the events app.

[m4v15]

Although I guess by path of least resistance the easier thing would be to just call it place. Tbh I can also be convinced easily either way

[mantagen]

In the DB it's not just an id. It's a populatable reference to an entity, called a place.

... I'd probably go with place

[mattlub]

I think this is agreed, we will remove all appended id